Family Of Dr. Perry Inhofe Files Wrongful Death Suit | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-07.07.25

Airborne-NextGen-07.08.25

AirborneUnlimited-07.09.25

Airborne-FlightTraining-07.10.25

AirborneUnlimited-07.11.25

Thu, Dec 11, 2014

Family Of Dr. Perry Inhofe Files Wrongful Death Suit

Attorney Claims NTSB Was Wrong In Citing Pilot Error Probable Cause In Fatal MU-2 Accident

The family of Dr. Perry Inhofe, the son of Senator Jim Inhofe, has filed a wrongful death suit saying one of the engines on the Mitsubishi MU-2B-25 Dr. Inhofe had recently purchased failed during the accident flight.

The NTSB said in its probable cause report, which is not admissible in court, that Dr. Inhofe lost control of the airplane "during a known one-engine-inoperative condition. The reasons for the loss of control and engine shutdown could not be determined because the airplane was not equipped with a crash-resistant recorder and postaccident examination and testing did not reveal evidence of any malfunction that would have precluded normal operation."

Dallas, TX-based attorney William Angelley said the NTSB was wrong in making that assessment. "My investigators found it within thirty minutes. Plus it's right there in the NTSB's own data," Angelley said in a news release reported by Tulsa television station KOTV.

The suit names engine manufacturer Honeywell International, as well as Landmark Aviation Services and Standard Aero, which the suit says worked on the engine that failed. It also names Intercontinental Jet Service Corporation, which the suit says reinstalled the engine on the MU-2.

The accident flight was the first time Dr. Inhofe had flown the airplane solo. He had completed  training required by the FAA for engine-out situations in the MU-2. In the suit, Angelley says the NTSB is wrong in saying that the MU-2 should have been "flyable" on one engine. Configured as the airplane was, the lawyer who is a former Navy helicopter pilot says, with landing gear and flaps extended, "virtually no one could have recovered from that. There is simply too much drag and not enough power."

(Mitsubishi MU-2 pictured in file photo. Not accident airplane)

FMI: NTSB Probable Cause Report

Advertisement

More News

Classic Aero-TV: Up Close And Personal - The Aeroshell Aerobatic Team at Oshkosh

From 2014 (YouTube Version): One Of The Airshow World's Pre-Eminent Formation Teams Chats About The State Of The Industry At EAA AirVenture 2014, ANN News Editor Tom Patton gets th>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (07.13.25): Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN)

Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) An ultra-high frequency electronic rho-theta air navigation aid which provides suitably equipped aircraft a continuous indication of bearing and dis>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (07.13.25)

Aero Linx: Doobert Hi, we're Chris & Rachael Roy, founders and owners of Doobert. Chris is a technology guy in his “day” job and used his experience to create Doobe>[...]

NTSB Prelim: Pitts S2

The Airplane Was Spinning In A Nose-Down Attitude Before It Impacted Terrain On June 20, 2025, at 0900 eastern daylight time, a Pitts Aerobatics S-2B, N79AV, was destroyed when it >[...]

Airborne 07.09.25: B-17 Sentimental Journey, Airport Scandal, NORAD Intercepts

Also: United Elite Sues, Newark ATC Transitions, Discovery Moves?, Textron @ KOSH The Commemorative Air Force Airbase Arizona is taking its “Flying Legends of Victory Tour&rd>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC